A Supplementary Reader

The Femme Guild of Sydney Presents: THE INAUGRAL SYDNEY FEMME CONFERENCE femme in the frame A Supplementary Reader This reader has been compiled with the intention of being a supplement to the content presented at 'Femme in the Frame' but should not be considered a complete resource. A 'recommended reading' list of websites and blogs have been provided at the end of this booklet. Femmes from around the world engage in powerful dialogues around femme identity and its intersection with race, ability, status, class, body, age and sexuality, utilising the internet to sustain an ongoing interaction. Any femme with an interest in the construction and nature of femme identity will find a fascinating and rich culture of femme-inism online, created and celebrated by everyday femmes from all walks of life. Pursuing further investigation is highly recommended! In the meantime, enjoy the readings contained within and consider visiting the blogs of the authors for even further femme-centric manifestos and musings. The Femme Guild hopes this collection of writings may inspire more femmes of all backgrounds to get online and begin sharing their own experiences of their identity. To aid this, a list of free blogging platforms has also been provided. Reclaiming Femme: Queer Women of Colour and Femme Identity By Vanessa Shanti Fernando SOURCE: http://writingforstrangers.com/writing/reclaiming- femme-queer-women-of-colour-and-femme-identity/ Members of queer and feminist communities often associate femme identity with subordination. Even within progressive circles, femininity is devalued due to its association with repressive heterosexual sex roles.[1] In her 1980 essay “Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence,” Adrienne Rich argues for a rejection of sex roles, and she differentiates between male-identified and woman-identified women. The male-identified woman is socially, politically, and intellectually attached to men, whereas the woman-identified woman directs her nurturing and emotional energies towards other women.[2] Rich commends the latter, while criticizing the former. In a patriarchal society, she argues, women who ally themselves with men are complicit in maintaining the hetero-patriarchy. For Rich, the ultimate embodiment of woman-identification is lesbianism, feminism’s natural extension.[3] This form of lesbianism—often based on politics rather than desire—sets up an androgynous, egalitarian ideal of lesbian sexuality, which reflects particular white, middle-class feminist values. Because they have rejected sex roles, second-wave lesbian feminists perceive butch/femme roles to be oppressive imitations of heterosexuality.[4] Lesbian feminists of the 1970s and 1980s link butches’ masculine gender expression to patriarchal power and femmes’ feminine presentation to artificiality and frivolity. Such feminists dismiss butch/femme roles as anachronistic, even when the individuals in question report feeling empowered and satisfied with their masculine and/or feminine gender presentations.[5] Defining butches as male-identified imposters and femmes as subordinate throwbacks imposes a singular standard of (white) lesbian authenticity, ignores the rich history of butch/femme resistance, and disregards the ways in which butch and femme women successfully create alternative gender identities that subvert the dominant sex/gender system. Assuming androgyny to be a more radical and empowering gender expression in all cases fails to recognize the multi- faceted identities of femmes of colour, whose specific position within queer and feminist communities invites a racial analysis that exposes issues of authenticity. Far from being passive victims of butch supremacy, femme women of colour challenge, empower, and transform femininity. Whereas heterosexual femininity is associated with artificiality and passivity, femme identity is a unique gender expression that enables self- acceptance and resistance to white, heterosexist, and patriarchal control. Prominent feminists have dismissed femininity as artificial and instead praised the development of traditionally masculine characteristics. This dismissal conflates femme and passivity. In her 1952 work The Second Sex, Simone de Beauvoir seeks to define what it means to be a woman. She argues that constructed ideals of femininity lie at the root of sex difference, and transform women into submissive prey, fixated on ensnaring men.[6] To counteract this subordinate status, de Beauvoir encourages women to become emancipated by “[refusing] the passivity man means to impose on her.”[7] Women achieve this emancipation by taking on “masculine values”: pursuing intellectual study, actively engaging with the world, entering the workforce, and competing in the capitalist system.[8] Embodying aspects of traditional masculinity, with its associations of power and legitimacy, allows women to challenge and expand their self- image and social role. However, feminism’s encouragement of masculinity comes at the expense of trivializing feminine expressions and roles, to damaging effect. In Whipping Girl: A Transsexual Woman on Sexism and the Scapegoating of Femininity, scholar and gender activist Julia Serano criticizes the feminist movement (specifically that of the 1970s and 1980s) for encouraging women to become more masculine or androgynous. Certain second-wave feminists believe that femininity is intrinsically linked to heterosexual indoctrination; it is nothing but an artificial performance designed to attract men.[9] However, in seeking to criticize sex-based oppression, these feminists replace the feminine-woman ideal with the androgynous-feminist ideal, itself a restrictive identity that does not leave space for many women to express their preferred gender(s).[10] Second- wave feminists fail to address the fact that gender itself is not oppressive; rather, it is the belief in binary gender and the disregard for gender variance that are the problem.[11] Further, the assumption that femininity is a heterosexual, socialized performance rather than an innate trait ignores the lived experiences of femme women. For femmes, femininity is an empowering, subversive, and intrinsically queer gender identity. It may be aesthetically pleasing to heterosexual males, but this fact does not invalidate femme identity’s potential for resistance. Paula Austin, a working-class African-Caribbean lesbian femme, echoes this sentiment in her statement that “looking like a proper woman can provide cover for far deeper survivals . [providing] both a safe disguise and secret nourishment.”[12] Taking on a femme identity does not relegate women to a subordinate status; rather, it allows for the queering of femininity itself. Identifying as femme is a way of embracing and reclaiming femininity on one’s own terms. As such, personal definitions and experiences of femme vary. Performance artist Leah Lilith Albrecht-Samarasinha describes femme as “queer. brassy, ballsy, loud, obnoxious . [i]t goes far beyond the standards of whitemiddleclass feminine propriety.”[13] Albrecht-Samarasinha performs femme style to reject conventional notions of femininity as passive, demure, and controlled. Moreover, she rejects the idea that white womanhood should be the universal ideal. She creates a new version of femininity, one that includes and values outspoken, politicized women of colour. Karen Bullock-Jordan, a “thirty-one-year old Midwestern black, single, SM/leatherdyke polyamorous Scorpio femme,” describes femme identity as [C]omplex . [s]ome days I feel like a housewife, others like an Amazon warrior; some days like a bimbo, others like an earth mother; some days like a grand diva, others like a quintessential femme fatale.[14] For Bullock-Jordan, femme identity implies fluidity. Her femme style allows for the expression of multiple identities. Even the bimbo is a choice and therefore a subversion of the conventional female stereotype. Further, the femme’s implicit love and lust for butch-identified women signifies a rejection of conformity, and a commitment to queer sexuality. Within working-class communities and communities of colour, the butch/femme relationship is often more radical and shocking than the white “uniform standard” of androgyny. Butches and femmes of colour “are queer and . come from home, at the same time.”[15] Queer femininity is outspoken, fluid, subversive– anything but passive. Although femmes define themselves as active agents, they are nevertheless rendered invisible, as the queer and straight community often perceive them to be heterosexual. The femme’s learned talents of receptivity, vulnerability, openness and communication require strength and active participation.[16] However, members of the queer community do not always recognize or appreciate these talents. In the 1950s lesbian bar culture, certain butches simultaneously valued and mocked femmes for being flighty—a display of their internalized misogyny.[17] Often, other queers only recognize femmes as lesbians when they are accompanied by a butch partner.[18] Despite femmes of colours’ radical gender expression, queer and feminist communities often value a white, androgynous/masculine aesthetic that does not recognize the multi-faceted and intersecting aspects of femmes’ identities. The poet Chrystos writes, I felt so much stricture & censorship from lesbians/I was supposed to be a carpenter to prove I was a real dyke/My differences were sloughed over/None of them came to a pow wow or an AIM fundraiser to see about me[.][19] Within her particular lesbian

Load more